Opinion
No. 98664
07-17-2013
STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE v. JOSEPH BRONCZYK DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
APPELLANT Joseph Bronczyk, Pro Se ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Timothy J. McGinty Cuyahoga County Prosecutor By: Holly Welsh Assistant County Prosecutor
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
JUDGMENT:
APPLICATION DENIED
Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court
Case No. CR-540345
Application for Reopening
Motion No. 465969
APPELLANT
Joseph Bronczyk, Pro Se
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
Timothy J. McGinty
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor
By: Holly Welsh
Assistant County Prosecutor
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, J.:
{¶1} On June 20, 2013, Joseph Bronczyk filed an application for reopening pursuant to App.R. 26(B). Bronczyk is attempting to reopen the appeal that was dismissed by this court on May 8, 2013.
App.R. 26(B)(1) provides that
a defendant in a criminal case may apply for reopening of the appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence, based on a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. An application for reopening shall be filed in the court of appeals where the appeal was decided within ninety days from journalization of the appellate judgment unless the applicant shows good cause for filing at a later time.(Emphasis added.)
{¶2} In the case sub judice, no appellate judgment was announced and journalized by this court that reviewed Bronczyk's conviction and sentence as rendered in State v. Bronczyk, Cuyahoga C.P. No. CR-540345. Thus, this court is prevented from considering Bronczyk's application for reopening as made pursuant to App.R. 26(B). State v. Loomer, 76 Ohio St.3d 398, 1996-Ohio-59, 667 N.E.2d 1209; See also State v. Halliwell, 8th Dist. No. 70369, 1999 Ohio App. LEXIS 285 (Jan. 28, 1999).
Accordingly, the application for reopening is denied. ________________
KATHLEEN ANN KEOUGH, JUDGE
FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., P.J., and
MARY EILEEN KILBANE, J., CONCUR